Will someone explain to me why a split Labour Party would be so awful (also Tory Party for that matter but it looks like they are papering over the cracks - for now)

(68 Posts)
crossroads3 Wed 13-Jul-16 11:48:11

That's all really. It's clear that both main parties are unrepresentative as they are constituted at present.... Why is everyone so scared of a realignment more in line with what voters want / need?

ItsAllGoingToBeFine Wed 13-Jul-16 11:50:40

A split Labour party would theoretically split votes ensuring that neither half of the split had any prospect of getting into power anytime soon.

They do need to split though into old labour and new labour - the two sides are just too different to ever reconcile

BreakingDad77 Wed 13-Jul-16 14:40:48

They do need to split though into old labour and new labour - the two sides are just too different to ever reconcile

Agreed, since and including blair and recent government we have had too much conservatism which has lead to the UK having highest inequality.

wooflesgoestotown Wed 13-Jul-16 14:54:47

Is it because FPTP would mean a split Labour Party would mean a permanent conservative government?

tiggytape Wed 13-Jul-16 14:56:42

Why is everyone so scared of a realignment more in line with what voters want / need?
The majority of the electorate are clustered around the centre. Very few are hard left or hard right.
Parties that appeal to the majority of voters are the only ones with a chance of power. All other parties are in effect protest parties. They may be able to influence mainstream politics with issues that genuinely concern some in the centre but a lot of their stuff is too hardcore for people to vote for in its entirety.

If Labour split there will be one left of centre party and one much further left. Neither of them will attract enough support from current Tory, Green and UKIP voters to give them a majority and therefore it will lessen the chances of a Labour government being formed.

BreakingDad77 Wed 13-Jul-16 14:58:41

Is it because FPTP would mean a split Labour Party would mean a permanent conservative government?

UKIP and greens I think would see a big upswing, lib dems would have previously.

Margrethe Wed 13-Jul-16 15:00:48

Just out of interest, can we put the parties on a continuum from left to right? It's striking me that the left is more splintered than the right. Which is bad in our voting system.

I'll try, you correct me. Going from right to left:

UKIP
Conservatives
LibDems
SNP
Labour
Greens

At the moment, it feels like the conservatives have grabbed the centre and the left is squabbling for scraps.

tiggytape Wed 13-Jul-16 15:03:32

Is it because FPTP would mean a split Labour Party would mean a permanent conservative government?
Tories benefit if the left vote is split because of the FPTP system because in a constituency where over 50% of voters vote for a left party, the Tories would be able to win eg:
new hard left party gets 20% of the vote
Labour as centre left get 31% of the vote
greens get 10%
Tories get 27% of the votes
= 61% of votes for a left party of some sort but a Tory victory overall.

tiggytape Wed 13-Jul-16 15:05:39

Typo there: 37 not 27 obviously for the Tories to win.
But basically they could be pretty unpopular overall but still manage to win if the left couldn't agree how far left to vote

BreakingDad77 Wed 13-Jul-16 15:48:01

At the moment, it feels like the conservatives have grabbed the centre and the left is squabbling for scraps.

This is the worrying thing that the perception that they are centrist and sit fairly in the middle.

(courtesy of political compass)

ErrolTheDragon Wed 13-Jul-16 15:58:18

That chart doesn't ring true - who are 'political compass'? confused

Yes, it's a huge problem that FPTP effectively means that centrists can't vote for a centrist party, leads to polarisation. Anyone old enough to remember the doldrums of the Foot/Kinnock years, the doomed hope of the SDP and then the Alliance? If Labour do split then FGS moderates, get yourselves together in some sensible way with libdems asap instead of wasting the opportunity.

UnikittyInHerBusinessSuit Wed 13-Jul-16 15:59:14

At the moment Labour have 230 seats. If a split resulted in 115 seats for Corbynite Labour and 115 seats for Blairite Labour then that would be fine (although the coalition negotiations would be fun if they ever gained enough seats to get that far, and you'd wonder why they went to the trouble of splitting)

But the problem is that there are quite a lot of current safe labour seats which would be split 30% CL, 20% BL, 35% Conservative 10% Lib Dem 5% Other, which would go Conservative under FPTP.

ErrolTheDragon Wed 13-Jul-16 16:07:11

I bet there's a lot of non-corbynite labour people now who would be appalled to be termed 'Blairite'! What would the name for the new party be - 'Really New Labour' ? And quite a lot of trad safe labour seats would probably also find quite a lot of vote going not to CL/RNL but to UKIP, just to make things worse.

MangoMoon Wed 13-Jul-16 16:13:47

Someone should just have done with it and start 'The Centre Party'.

Just call it what it is, no need to prove your right or left credentials by doing barmy 'traditional' right or left stuff.

Simply cherry pick the best ideas from all parties and run with it.

Everyone's a winner!

Itinerary Wed 13-Jul-16 16:16:18

I think Labour should go back to its roots, and yes, split in two if needs be. Blair moved the goalposts too far. Why don't the New Labour supporters merge with the Lib Dems?

BreakingDad77 Wed 13-Jul-16 16:21:41

That chart doesn't ring true - who are 'political compass'?

Its an attempt to address when people just use the blunt terms left and right as there is another dimension to it. I find this answers very well for me why I have become so disenfranchised with the main parties.

tiggytape Wed 13-Jul-16 16:34:51

LibDems aren't necessarily a natural fit with Labour anymore than they were seen to be a natural fit with Conservatives when they went into coalition with the Tories in 2010.

Lib Dem may be left but they are also very much more small state and hands-off in their approach than Labour
They are more liberal too (eg they were appalled at Labour's ideas about identity cards and ideas that lead to state interference in everyday life)

Before 2010 some saw LibDems as "Labour-lite" but when the coalition was being formed many saw it going the other way and were a bit shocked to see that LibDems policies appeal to people on the right too.

MangoMoon Wed 13-Jul-16 16:34:52

I just did the test BreakingDad - I was shock at where I came out.

I thought I would be pretty central on both axis.
I came out almost at Green Party (and I think they're a crazy bunch!).

BreakingDad77 Wed 13-Jul-16 16:43:46

Agree with tiggy tape, obviously this isn't perfect but it does try to capture these subtleties like ID cards etc.

Labour have probably moved down the graph a bit but not sure how much to the left.

Motheroffourdragons Wed 13-Jul-16 17:23:20

Mango - I was the same shock.

I have said on another thread today that for the first time in my life I may not vote labour but green in the next election smile

MangoMoon Wed 13-Jul-16 17:26:15

Nooooo!!
They're loons!
(I think.... shock)
I was very, very shocked indeed.

Motheroffourdragons Wed 13-Jul-16 18:09:37

flowers for you. It must be nonsense smile

Itinerary Wed 13-Jul-16 18:45:46

My result was close to yours Mango. I'd like to be able to vote for a Labour party which was left-wing and libertarian, instead of right-wing and authoritarian! With all the largest parties in the top right square, it's no wonder that people often say the parties/politicians are "all the same".

prettybird Thu 14-Jul-16 13:24:02

Depends which Labour Party you are talking about wink

Under Blair, New Labour was definitely between the Conservatives and the SNP on the left/right continuum shock

Even now, the voting records in parliament would suggest that the SNP are to the left of the PLP - at least they bother to vote rather than abstain or just not turn up

Margrethe Thu 14-Jul-16 15:56:48

I didn't take the test, but I found this critique of it:
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Political_Compass

Obviously, we might all calibrate the test differently if we were its authors because human beings alway shave a point of view, including this test's designer.

Still interesting though.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now